W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

RE: [css3-transitions] shorthand/longhand handling in transition property

From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 01:55:09 +0000
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3C4041FF83E1E04A986B6DC50F01782903429AFF@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

[L. David Baron:]
 
> On Friday 2010-10-22 22:04 +0000, Sylvain Galineau wrote:
> > The current Editor's Draft [1] defines both the following rules:
> >
> > # If one of the identifiers listed is a shorthand property,
> > implementations # must start transitions for any of its longhand
> > sub-properties that are animatable, # using the duration, delay, and
> > timing function at the index corresponding to the # shorthand.
> >
> > # If a property is specified multiple times in the value of 'transition-
> property'
> > # (either on its own or via a shorthand that contains it), then the
> > transition that # starts uses the duration, delay, and timing function
> > at the index corresponding to # the last occurrence of the property.
> >
> > What seems undefined is whether the following results in a duplicate:
> >
> > transition-property: border-width, border-right-width;
> > transition-duration: 3s, 1s;
> >
> > In other words, should this be equivalent to (a):
> >
> > transition-property: border-top-width, border-bottom-width,
> > border-left-width, border-right-width;
> > transition-duration: 3s, 3s, 3s, 1s;
> >
> > Or (b):
> >
> > transition-property: border-top-width, border-right-width,
> > border-bottom-width, border-left-width, border-right-width;
> > transition-duration: 3s, 3s, 3s, 3s, 1s;
> 
> So the current editor's draft contains the wording:
> 
>   # If a property is specified multiple times in the value of
>   # ‘transition-property’ (either on its own, via a shorthand that
>   # contains it, or via the ‘all’ value), then the transition that
>   # starts uses the duration, delay, and timing function at the
>   # index corresponding to the last item in the value of
>   # ‘transition-property’ that calls for animation that property.
> 
> (It's been there for a bit, though I just modified it a bit to match a
> resolution regarding 'all' that we made at TPAC.)
> 
> I think this makes things clear enough.  Does it seem ok to you?
> 
It does, yes. Though the last line looks odd. Did you mean

...that calls for animation *of* that property

Or

....that calls for animating *that* property


Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 01:56:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:50 GMT